Offensive Line Ratings from the Giants game...

[MichaelWinicki]

So you think it's ok to post the actual grades but not what they mean?

Great thread.

Obviously you didn't read the entire thread because there at least two posts that described the grading system.

 

[dantheman41]

I agree wholeheartedly with the above. Especially Bern having a -4.5. Bern almost got Romo killed on a few occasions. Even though he was only sacked (officially) once, but he was hit and/or knocked down at least a dozen times. That's gotta stop or Romo won't make it to week 10. Bern is an inconsistent liability out there.

I think PFF got it right, but what's your take on the below from the mothership?

LINK

Seems to be a spin job by Broaddus, but then again, I'm not a scout. I still hope BW is ready to play v. KC.

Broaddus always sticks up for Bern for some reason. He can NEVER do wrong according to broaddus even though he clearly sucked.

Probably why Parcells fired Broaddus he is overly emotional and tied to players.

He's so predictable. Now he's going to grade Waters very harshly because he's bitter Bern is losing his job

 

[Hoofbite]

They segment their grading scale into 9 possible scores?

Didnt know that. A bit much for me.

 

[noshame]

Thanks Mike, I hope you post this weekly so we can build a average per player as the season progresses. Over-all impressive week against the giants DL.

 

[bark]

Thanks for posting michael.

 

[gimmesix]

From Profootballfocus.com (you can subscribe yourself for $26.99)

Smith +0.3
Leary -2.0
Frederick -0.5
Bernadau -4.5
Free +2.3

No surprises to me... I thought Free played a heck of a game.

That appears accurate from what I saw when I rewatched the game. Bernadeau had the most blown assignments, followed by Leary and Frederick. Smith was mostly good, other than giving up a couple of quick pressures. And Free was very solid. He allowed Pierre-Paul to go wide around him on the sack by the DT and gave up the sack by Pierre-Paul when Romo held the ball too long.

 

[CowboyDiver]

So you think it's ok to post the actual grades but not what they mean?

Great thread.

I think the guys are missing your point. The scores you are posting are the actual results you have to PAY for on the site. I think they wouldn't have a problem with you posting their methodolgy since it's available to everyone but think posting their actual results would probably be crossing the line.

 

[Section446]

From Profootballfocus.com (you can subscribe yourself for $26.99)

Smith +0.3
Leary -2.0
Frederick -0.5
Bernadau -4.5
Free +2.3

No surprises to me... I thought Free played a heck of a game.

Heck yeah, Free looked like a man on a mission. If we can get 75% of that from him every week, the edges will be solid.

 

[iceman117]

So Frederick played bad? I didn't think so, bern on the other hand though ...

i don't think the grade suggest he played bad, I'm assuming because I don't know for sure that 0 is a good grade, anything over 0 is very good. So -0.5 translates he played a solid game, not great, not bad... that's how I read it but I could be wrong and anyone who knows for sure please feel free to clarify.

I also don't think the grades take into consideration who you did it against and the reason what Smith did was so impressive is because he did it against their best defensive linemen. Again I'm just speculating so any clarification is welcome

 

[MichaelWinicki]

i don't think the grade suggest he played bad, I'm assuming because I don't know for sure that 0 is a good grade, anything over 0 is very good. So -0.5 translates he played a solid game, not great, not bad... that's how I read it but I could be wrong and anyone who knows for sure please feel free to clarify.

I also don't think the grades take into consideration who you did it against and the reason what Smith did was so impressive is because he did it against their best defensive linemen. Again I'm just speculating so any clarification is welcome

You're right on Frederick's grade. Average. Which I think is very good considering it was his first start and the competition he was facing.

Plus look at where he ranked (15th) among all centers after week 1.

No, the grades do not take into consideration who Smith was facing. It would make the grading process far more difficult and even more open for speculation because someone(s) would need to assign "opponent quality scores" to everyone... And I would think that would be a huge and probably inaccurate headache.

Take for example JPP, who was facing Smith. Yes, JPP is an exceptional DE, but he's just coming back from back surgery and has hardly practiced so is he a "100%" JPP? Probably not. Is he "50%"? Heck if I know. But he probably was not 100%. So how much "bonus" should Smith earn for that? See how fast this could turn into a cluster if you have to figure in opponent quality– or lack thereof?

I think they approach it the right way. Disregard the opponent and simply grade if the player in question did his job and how well he did it.

 

[CaptainMorgan]

I dont think Free had a very good game. He cant even pull out and lead block on screens because hes so slow and clumsy. Frederick was excellent from what I saw. Bernie was abysmal as usual. Leary and Smith did fine.

 

[iceman117]

You're right on Frederick's grade. Average. Which I think is very good considering it was his first start and the competition he was facing.

Plus look at where he ranked (15th) among all centers after week 1.

No, the grades do not take into consideration who Smith was facing. It would make the grading process far more difficult and even more open for speculation because someone(s) would need to assign "opponent quality scores" to everyone... And I would think that would be a huge and probably inaccurate headache.

Take for example JPP, who was facing Smith. Yes, JPP is an exceptional DE, but he's just coming back from back surgery and has hardly practiced so is he a "100%" JPP? Probably not. Is he "50%"? Heck if I know. But he probably was not 100%. So how much "bonus" should Smith earn for that? See how fast this could turn into a cluster if you have to figure in opponent quality– or lack thereof?

I think they approach it the right way. Disregard the opponent and simply grade if the player in question did his job and how well he did it.

100% agree they do it the right way.

I was saying that in reference to someone else saying the grades are dumb because Free was graded higher than Smith. So I said the main reason we were so impressed with Smith was because of who he was facing and I didn't think the grades reflected who his opponent was and that's why we all thought Smith played so well because he was lined up across from JPP. I had the feeling they couldn't possible factor that in accuratley

 

[Texas_Pete]

There is no way you could watch the film and think Berny was better than your initial impression.

Bern graded out as the worst among the starters. I agree with that. I am on the bandwagon for making Waters the starter, and hope that Bern be the swing guard that we don't have at all this year. Just my two cents.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

100% agree they do it the right way.

I was saying that in reference to someone else saying the grades are dumb because Free was graded higher than Smith. So I said the main reason we were so impressed with Smith was because of who he was facing and I didn't think the grades reflected who his opponent was and that's why we all thought Smith played so well because he was lined up across from JPP. I had the feeling they couldn't possible factor that in accuratley

Exactly right.

The thing some need to keep in mind is that these guys don't play to the same level game after game.. A good player will have an off game here and there and the less-good player will have games where he grades out darned well.

 

[starfrombirth]

I also look forwads to Waters getting in the lineup but I also thought the OL did a pretty good job on the night. I think there were times Romo held the ball a bit long including the play where his ribs were injured. I think that was a good test for the Cowboys playing aginst that Giants front 7, My hope is this group can play together and develop some chemistry over the course of the season

Romo had no time.. NO TIME! (Armagedon ) on that play. More often than not he got skittish and didn't hold the ball long enough.

 

[BlindFaith]

The grades are cumulative. For example if Frederick scored a .5 on one play, and a 1 on the other and then left the game, his score would be a 1.5, not a .75.

Then the grades are even more nonsensical. So a guy does his job all game, 40+ snaps, gets a zero grade for each of those plays. Then he has a questionable holding call against him and on the next play gives up a questionable sack. Some guy eating a box of donuts in his moms basement decides to give him a -1 and a -1 for those two plays.

You're telling me that now, the guy who had done his job all game long, gets a game score of -2?

That's just a joke.

 

[CowboyDiver]

Actually, since offenses usually get about 60 snaps a game....it would be more like 58 times he did his job,and two he didn't and he ends up with a bad score.

 

[Nirvana]

it sounds like we could use an upgrade at RG - who knew?

 

[cowboysooner]

I have two main gripes to PFF's offensive line grading. They overemphasize the importance of penalties. And run blocking and pass blocking is judged on a cumulative basis.

The run blocks where olinemen get out in space are given huge scores which explains why the very good Joe Staley made their All-Pro team but very, very few teams would want or pay Joe Staley as much as Joe Thomas, Duane Brown or Ryan Clady. To the marketplace of gm's, pass blocking is much more important.

That said, it is a decent scouting tool and anybody defending the play of Bernie is nuts.

 

[tantrix1969]

Bern was a disaster. I can't believe Broaddus is still spinning for this guy. Leary will improve that was his first start. Can't wait for Waters!

yea the lengths he's gone to explain why what we saw wasn't really the case when it applies to bern are pretty laughable